How did Ben Shapiro or other Daily Wire leaders comment on Candace Owens' exit?

1. What the company said — an abrupt corporate notice

Daily Wire CEO Jeremy Boreing posted that “Daily Wire and Candace Owens have ended their relationship,” signaling a company-driven public break rather than a joint, negotiated exit statement ^[1]. The Variety report frames this as an organizational decision coming after months of internal friction, not solely a unilateral resignation by Owens ^[1].

2. Where Ben Shapiro fits — public critic, not the formal announcer

Available sources do not show Ben Shapiro issuing the company’s announcement; instead, Shapiro figure prominently in coverage because he and Owens had publicly clashed for months over her comments about Israel and other controversies ^{[1] [2]}. Reporting and profiles identify Shapiro as a co‑founder whose disputes with Owens contributed to a fraught workplace atmosphere that preceded the end of their professional relationship ^[2].

3. The proximate cause cited in reporting — tensions tied to Israel comments

Multiple outlets tie Owens’ departure to her series of posts and statements criticizing U.S. support for Israel, including language that colleagues considered antisemitic; those tensions are repeatedly described as “months” in the lead-up to the split ^{[1] [2]}. Ben Shapiro — a prominent pro‑Israel conservative voice and Daily Wire co‑founder — publicly labeled some of Owens’ remarks “absolutely disgraceful,” and that disagreement is central in news accounts of why the relationship ended ^[2].

4. How other outlets and commentators framed it — cross‑ideological repudiation

Coverage shows disagreement about Owens’ status across the right‑wing ecosystem: pro‑Israel conservatives like Shapiro and others publicly criticized her, while different figures on the right sometimes defended or cheered her provocations ^{[3] [4]}. Media analysis also places Owens in a longer pattern of contentious statements and conspiracy‑minded claims that had already strained relationships with institutions and colleagues ^{[3] [4]}.

5. Owens’ response and aftermath — going solo and continuing to provoke

Reports note that Owens said she would continue her work independently — directing fans to her site and saying she would return to hosting on her own YouTube channel after a hiatus — indicating she framed the split as an opportunity to operate outside Daily Wire’s structures ^[1]. Other outlets later reported Owens thanking the Daily Wire for firing her as she built an independent audience, suggesting she has positioned the separation as part of a larger branding strategy ^[5].

6. Limitations and what the sources do not say

The supplied reporting does not include the text of every social‑media exchange between Shapiro and Owens, nor does it provide internal Daily Wire deliberations or an on‑record statement from Ben Shapiro announcing the decision (not found in current reporting) ^{[1] [2]}. Exact timing of specific tweets or private conversations that might have precipitated the move are not documented in these sources ^[1].

7. Competing narratives and potential agendas

Daily Wire’s official posture — a CEO announcement — frames the separation as corporate and final, which serves the company’s interest in controlling the narrative ^[1]. Owens’ framing of the outcome as a badge of honor for her independent brand serves her commercial and political agenda ^{[1] [5]}. Meanwhile, third‑party commentators, ranging from conservative allies to liberal critics, have used the episode to either warn about the spread of conspiratorial claims ^{[3] [4]} or to criticize perceived censorship or ideological policing (available sources do not mention specific voices arguing the latter in these excerpts).

8. Bottom line for readers

The documented record in these sources shows the Daily Wire announced the split and places Ben Shapiro at the center of months‑long tensions over Owens’ Israel‑related commentary, but it does not show Shapiro issuing the formal separation notice himself ^{[1] [2]}. Interpretations differ depending on outlet and ideological perspective, and the available reporting leaves open internal details that only company insiders could confirm ^[1].